Clover Trail Atoms will give Windows 8 tablets ARM-like battery life

The processor is the least interesting part of the next Atom platform.

Intel's next generation of Atom processors made headlines last week because it will completely eschew Linux support, but that wasn't the only detail about the new Clover Trail platform that came out of last week's Intel Developer Forum—the same power usage optimizations that make it incompatible with Linux also make it an interesting choice for Windows 8 tablets, and give us a peek at the power-saving tricks used in Intel's next-generation Haswell chips to boot.

Clover Trail basics

Slated to arrive in October, the Clover Trail SoC is a close relative of the Medfield platform that we've seen in Atom-powered smartphones like the Xolo 900—it uses the same 32nm CPU architecture (codenamed Saltwell), but is a dual-core rather than a single-core part and is paired with a more powerful GPU, a dual-core PowerVR SGX 544MP2 GPU that is said to be comparable to Apple's A5X in graphics performance.

We'll likely see Clover Trail in many of the first Windows 8 tablets, slotted in between the Windows RT devices at the low end and the low-power Ivy Bridge devices at the high end—Lenovo's ThinkPad Tablet 2 is said to use Clover Trail, as are several of the other laptop-like Windows 8 tablets introduced at this year's IFA. According by Intel, Clover Trail should enable these tablets to deliver ten hours of battery life and a month or so of standby time in an 8.5mm thick package that weighs about a pound and a half—comparable, in other words, to current 10" ARM-based tablets.

Power savings: the "active idle" system state revisited

The most interesting bits revealed about Clover Trail pertained to how it achieves these battery life numbers—in Intel's Haswell presentation, the company talked about a new system power state it dubbed "S0ix," also called "active idle." Unlike the traditional S3 and S4 (sleep and hibernate, respectively) states, a system in this S0ix state is still connected to the Internet, and Windows applications that use background task and push notification APIs can still retrieve data. System resume time is also said to be instantaneous, wasting less power than in the transition between sleep states.

Enlarge/ Clover saves power using the same S0ix system state as Haswell, pictured above.

Intel

Another power-saving feature, and one that is standard in basically all mobile devices these days, is hardware accelerated video and audio playback designed to offload these common tasks from the CPU to more power-efficient parts of the SoC. Clover Trail's GPU can decode 1080p MPEG4, H.264, and MPEG2 streams, and its audio offloading engine can be used to play HTML5 audio or audio from applications using the Windows Media Foundation or Windows Audio Session APIs—however, the audio engine is only available to applications from the Windows Store, and not to standard desktop applications.

The Clover Trail platform also supports other standard tablet amenities—magnetometers, accelerometers, gyroscopes, GPSes, NFC, and ambient light sensors are all supported, and the chip includes an image signal processor (ISP) that helps it process images and video taken with integrated cameras.

Conclusions and observations on the Linux situation

While Clover Trail's power usage technology will be interesting (and will give us some indication of how accurate Intel's lofty power usage numbers for Haswell chips are), the processor itself is going to sport performance that's not much faster than the Atoms that we've been seeing in netbooks for the last few years. Next year's Bay Trail platform—which will introduce quad-core chips, Intel's own in-house GPUs, and a major architectural upgrade to the Atom line—should prove to be a more interesting performer.

While Intel has played up the new chip's compatibility with Windows 8, it's worth noting that the lack of support for Linux in this particular Atom seems to me like an anomaly rather than the new normal. In its Haswell presentation, Intel made no mention of the S0ix power state being incompatible with non-Windows operating systems, saying only that the sleep state transitions would be "automatic" and "transparent to well-written software." It's also worth noting that Medfield SoCs, which are extremely similar to Clover Trail SoCs, run Android in smartphones without complaint.

I wouldn't expect this Linux support issue to affect future Atom chips, especially those used outside of tablets. Server chips are still on Intel's roadmaps for both its Atom and Core-series CPUs, and while lack of support for Linux on the desktop wouldn't have much of an impact on Intel's bottom line, putting the same restrictions on server chips would be a much larger problem. If anything, the Bay Trail Atom platform's switch away from PowerVR GPUs back to Intel's own in-house graphics products should improve Linux driver compatibility—we won't know anything for sure until the Bay Trail chips are nearer to launching, but I'd be very much surprised if they don't restore Linux compatibility to the lineup.

Listing image by Intel

Andrew Cunningham
Andrew has a B.A. in Classics from Kenyon College and has over five years of experience in IT. His work has appeared on Charge Shot!!! and AnandTech, and he records a weekly book podcast called Overdue. Twitter@AndrewWrites

I'm interested in how these perform in actual use. I was planning to sell my iPad and laptop to fund a Surface Pro when they come out but if these come close to the performance of a "traditional" notebook CPU with the lower power draw and portability of the ARM chips then I may hold off for a similar device with CloverTrail instead. I'll still probably go with the Surface Pro since it may be a while before we see anything comparable with these new processors but it's definitely interesting.

I'm interested in how these perform in actual use. I was planning to sell my iPad and laptop to fund a Surface Pro when they come out but if these come close to the performance of a "traditional" notebook CPU with the lower power draw and portability of the ARM chips then I may hold off for a similar device with CloverTrail instead. I'll still probably go with the Surface Pro since it may be a while before we see anything comparable with these new processors but it's definitely interesting.

I'd take a look at the HP Envy x2. The only disappointing thing about it is the 1366x768 screen, and it doesn't seem that any of the Clover Trail tablets will use a 1080p panel. My guess is that Microsoft and Intel want a larger focus on battery life than screen appearance.

That's rather contradictory to all of the mindless "end of the PC" rhetoric that iPhone users like to spout.

If you are going to displace PCs, then you are going to have to actually replace them in a meaningful way. That includes performance. Someone might actually want to do some actual computation even if it's just indirectly.

If iPhone users didn't care about CPU performance then such improvements wouldn't be heavily advertised features of new devices.

Hasn't Intel been saying the same thing, come tick or tock, for about the last six years?

Tick-tock has never applied to Atom chips though.

Yeah, that should start with Silvermont/Valleyview/Bay Trail chips next year, but up until now Atom's architecture has remained much the same since 2008. It's simply gotten more integrated, which will help it actually get into tablets.

Microsoft has to be wondering whether it was really worth it to port Windows to ARM, right about now.

Yes, it was still worth. First, because MS cannot wait for forever to Intel or any other company to come with better technology. We until now, dont know the performance of these devices. In general, no company can commit on ETA for an break through technology.

Secondly, MS can have a fresh start and can proceed with apple like ecosystem just because of this excuse, and still no restrictions from EU.

Microsoft has to be wondering whether it was really worth it to port Windows to ARM, right about now.

So far Intel is far from proven in the tablet market. ARM is dominant. Also, it probably wasn't hard as WP8 bears a lot in common with W8 and obviously runs on ARM chips. Microsoft always tries to cover a lot of bases.

That's rather contradictory to all of the mindless "end of the PC" rhetoric that iPhone users like to spout.

Two questions: how did this turn into an iPhone-related discussion? And how many iOS users spout "end of the PC"? I'm going to silently ignore the first question to address the second:

Apple stated "post-PC" which never went on to state that the PC was dead. The point was that the PC as a construct was, in their view, a legacy product. There are now, and there will continue to be, workflows that demand such a machine tethered to a power connection and a wide pipe for data transmission, etc. That's precisely why they continue to update and improve their Mac products.

But their point was that the focal point of usage has shifted to persistently-connected, always-on, ultra-mobile devices that you have with you at nearly all times. That doesn't mean it's displaced PCs for every workflow, but rather it's displaced PCs as a construct of where you go to remain connected.

Quote:

If iPhone users didn't care about CPU performance then such improvements wouldn't be heavily advertised features of new devices.

iOS users -- and I would argue most users entrenched in this "post-PC" paradigm -- don't care about CPU performance. They care about its benefits. "Oh, my new iPhone 5 runs Angry Birds faster on an even larger screen! Cool!" Not something, like, "Oh, my quad core 1.4 GHz Exynos -- when compared to my old dual-core Snapdragon -- launches Angry Birds so much faster! Cool!" There are, of course, both camps, but I would say that focusing on a particular part number is irrelevant, since it's tightly coupled to the device in question.

And now we know why the reason this chip will not be available on Linux.

Licensing for the hardware Windows codec acceleration.

Windows uses industry standard codecs these days, like h.264 and VC-1. I think the real reason is that MS paid Intel to customize the chipset to take advantage of some proprietary power management strategies, and now Intel can't provide Linux support without violating some confidentiality agreement they have with MS over those strategies. So now Linux support for Clover Trail becomes "you're on your own".

The question is if it's a real 10 hours, like, you can just accidentally get 10 hours of battery life using it normally, or if that's an unattainable "up to" figure that requires labratory conditions. The nice thing about ARM chips (at least in the context of the iPad, which is what I'm familar with) is that you really get the 10 hours of general usage, translating into days between charges.

I keep my bet that Intel will beat out ARM in the mobile space, their fabrication is years ahead of what any ARM vendor can offer. Apple's A6 is a 32nm beast compared to Intels current 22nm process which is reducing to 14nm next year and to 5nm by 2019. No ARM vendor has plans that can match this nor do they have invested the R&D required to push their limitations. So I predict that ARM are going to be unable to continue pushing performance to the same degree as Intel while lowering power consumption (or keeping it at the same level). By say 2015 Intel will likely be highly competitive with ARM across the board, even on price provided they want the market badly enough (and I think Intel are willing to burn serious cash to win marketshare).

So while I don't wish my iPad had an i7, I certainly wish the model I buy to replace it in a few years will have an Intel chip in it.

Well AD join seals the deal for me.... if these things get the battery life/standby time then its a huge win for enterprise... Being able to leverage your existing device management/deployment software is huge...

I'm interested in how these perform in actual use. I was planning to sell my iPad and laptop to fund a Surface Pro when they come out but if these come close to the performance of a "traditional" notebook CPU with the lower power draw and portability of the ARM chips then I may hold off for a similar device with CloverTrail instead. I'll still probably go with the Surface Pro since it may be a while before we see anything comparable with these new processors but it's definitely interesting.

It's the same atom core we've had for years; if current netbooks are too slow for you, this will be just as bad. If they're good enough to use as a spare computer then so will cloverfield.

Microsoft has to be wondering whether it was really worth it to port Windows to ARM, right about now.

MS has maintained multiple unreleased architecture ports for years. They do it to make sure they don't accidentally lock themselves into a single architecture by baking proprietary features into it in a non-portable fashion. With rumors of doom circulating around the Itanium adding a replacement platform in advance is a reasonable move even if it ends up dead in the market.

And now we know why the reason this chip will not be available on Linux.

Licensing for the hardware Windows codec acceleration.

Maybe; but avoiding the mess that's revolved around other atoms with closed PowerVR GPUs would be reason enough for Intel to not officially support it. PVR's made it clear they won't release an opensource driver or maintain existing binaries to maintain kernel compatibility; without that Intel'd be on the receiving end of almost as much internet rage anyway, so why bother.

I'm interested in how these perform in actual use. I was planning to sell my iPad and laptop to fund a Surface Pro when they come out but if these come close to the performance of a "traditional" notebook CPU with the lower power draw and portability of the ARM chips then I may hold off for a similar device with CloverTrail instead. I'll still probably go with the Surface Pro since it may be a while before we see anything comparable with these new processors but it's definitely interesting.

I'd take a look at the HP Envy x2. The only disappointing thing about it is the 1366x768 screen, and it doesn't seem that any of the Clover Trail tablets will use a 1080p panel. My guess is that Microsoft and Intel want a larger focus on battery life than screen appearance.

The Samsung Series 5 Hybrid's worth looking at too. 11.6", 1366x768, and IIRC ~$750 with the keydock. The article I saw on the HP suggested they'd want >$1k for it.

The question is if it's a real 10 hours, like, you can just accidentally get 10 hours of battery life using it normally, or if that's an unattainable "up to" figure that requires labratory conditions. The nice thing about ARM chips (at least in the context of the iPad, which is what I'm familar with) is that you really get the 10 hours of general usage, translating into days between charges.

There were netbooks that got 10 hours of battery life, so I don't see that it's unachievable. The question is whether it's going to run like crap or whether it will be usable.

Microsoft has stripped a bunch out of Windows RT so that it will (one hopes) run OK on ARM. But Windows 8 for Intel will still run all the old Windows apps and such. Is Windows 8 on Clover Trail going to perform like Windows RT on ARM, or like Windows 7 on a crappy netbook?

I keep my bet that Intel will beat out ARM in the mobile space, their fabrication is years ahead of what any ARM vendor can offer.

This is what I thought, too, but Intel doesn't seem to be using it's latest process on these chips. Apple just released the A6 which is 2x faster than the A5, and the A5 isn't much slower than what Intel has now.

Really the bigger issue for Intel is that mobile chips are significantly cheaper than the desktop/notebook stuff they sell. What happens when a cheap ARM CPU/GPU combo becomes "good enough" for most of what end users want to do? How do they continue to justify $300+ prices for their CPUs? To put things in perspective, the A5 is estimated to cost Apple roughly $25 per unit and Intel charges somewhere north of $200 for their lower end mobile core i3 line.

i'm not sure to understand everything concerning all the processors, GPU performance and windows 8 versions. I thought that the fact that Windows 8 were supposed to be the same on ARM architecture and x86 architecture would be an important factor. But as a technologist since about 13 years, i must admit that this is the most confusing windows release ever.

First, there will be windows RT for ARM processors. The applications released for this version will not work at all on x86 architecture. And most of the functionnalities that we can expect (like the desktop and some important features of Office) will not be present.

Second, there will be Windows 8 "normal" edition which is compatible with the x86 architecture. So I assume that if I want perfect compatiblity on my "ipad-style" tablet and my desktop, i should use this version.

Third, If i want to buy windows 8 for my desktop, there will be some unintuitive features if I don't have a touchscreen... Problem is, touchscreen monitor are really rare. Most of the touchscreen things are full all-in-one desktop. And i don't want to go back to a 17inch monitor restaurant-like touchscreen. LOL. I'm still looking for something around 24inch and that is around 1inch deep (maximum) and good looking.

Fourth, and now the subject related to this article. The processors choices are a pure mess. There will be some tablets on ivy-bridge architecture, which is somewhat performant for a table. but at a cost of battery life, to the point where it would be totally useless to have one.

Then there are some Atom chips, which are so low-end that the performance equal a 10 year old PC. And now this new kind of atom chips which come so late that Apple will outperform it already in january with the new-new-ipad and my newly bought tablet will look like 3 years old.

So, my question is :

i'm about to make the switch and buy Windows 8 for my entire set of computers and possibly buy a tablet. I want everything to be compatible and communicate well all-togheter. So I don't want an ARM processor. I don't want anything from apple because i don't like the Apple ecosystem and the mandatory choice to have to install Itunes. I want to drop files via drag and drop or copy paste like i've always did on all my PC, i want everything to work togheter like my domain and my functionnalities always did. But what tablet to choose? what processor to choose? what graphics specs should I look for? Anyone have any suggestion on a good touchscreen monitor compatible with windows 8 multi-point requirement and that will not break my budget for the next 2 years? Will there be any good tablet that combine performance and average-to-good battery life?

I keep my bet that Intel will beat out ARM in the mobile space, their fabrication is years ahead of what any ARM vendor can offer. Apple's A6 is a 32nm beast compared to Intels current 22nm process which is reducing to 14nm next year and to 5nm by 2019. No ARM vendor has plans that can match this nor do they have invested the R&D required to push their limitations. So I predict that ARM are going to be unable to continue pushing performance to the same degree as Intel while lowering power consumption (or keeping it at the same level). By say 2015 Intel will likely be highly competitive with ARM across the board, even on price provided they want the market badly enough (and I think Intel are willing to burn serious cash to win marketshare).

I have always held a similar opinion.

Last year all the chatter was: "Intel is dead forever in Mobile. ARM is so much more efficient Intel can't catch up. Apple will switch laptops to ARM, ARM will take over windows laptops etc..."

But it should have been obvious that Intel low power mobile efforts were not a priority. Last year their mobile solutions were multi-chip and at least one of the chips was fabbed on 65nm, so obviously Intel wasn't exactly putting a full effort into mobile. But instead of noting that, most just assumed ARM was going to win forever because they were technically unassailable.

This of course was total nonsense. Intel is just barely starting to show the mobile turnaround by getting to 32nm (new desktops are on 22nm) and they still have a 4 year old ATOM core.

But once that Tic-Toc cycle comes to Mobile, look out. Intel will likely keep a lead on the process side.

The reality is that Intel and ARM were targeting complete different performance envelopes and thus different power envelopes, but now the performance envelopes and power envelopes are both converging.

Still what I expect is that Intel really won't make any Android headway, and ARM won't make any Windows headway. So they will each maintain their strongholds.

Though I expect the first Next generation 22nm Atom chips with some benefits over ARM will have the same chattering classes predicting the death of ARM, with Android and iPhones swithcing to Intel. If they were in charge, companies would switch ISA every year.

The current Atoms are in that category. The new ones will be MUCH faster, featuring out of order execution.

ciueli wrote:

This is what I thought, too, but Intel doesn't seem to be using it's latest process on these chips. Apple just released the A6 which is 2x faster than the A5, and the A5 isn't much slower than what Intel has now....

...the A5 is estimated to cost Apple roughly $25 per unit and Intel charges somewhere north of $200 for their lower end mobile core i3 line.

The A6 isn't even CLOSE to the performance of an i3, it's not close to a current Celeron either. You have to compare to Atom, and Intel's prices for those aren't far off $25.

urkam wrote:

First, there will be windows RT for ARM processors. The applications released for this version will not work at all on x86 architecture. And most of the functionnalities that we can expect (like the desktop and some important features of Office) will not be present.

For WinRT apps, which all you can run on Windows RT, ARM and x86 (and x64) are checkboxes in Visual Studio. The apps will work on both. And the Office on RT is basically the full featured Home and Student version.

First, there will be windows RT for ARM processors. The applications released for this version will not work at all on x86 architecture.

That's 100% false. The "metro" apps written for Windows RT are written for the new Windows RunTime (also known as WinRT for short). Applications written in WinRT will be usable for both x86 and ARM processors. That's the whole POINT of Windows 8-- new development platform that works across chip types.

Quote:

Second, there will be Windows 8 "normal" edition which is compatible with the x86 architecture. So I assume that if I want perfect compatiblity on my "ipad-style" tablet and my desktop, i should use this version.

You can have a Windows 8 i7 desktop and a Windows RT ARM-based tablet and run the same Metro apps. You just can't use legacy applications (x86-based) on ARM architecture. All of the "metro" apps will work across platform, and can be installed on up to 5 different machines of your choice.

Quote:

Third, If i want to buy windows 8 for my desktop, there will be some unintuitive features if I don't have a touchscreen...

Which features are you talking about? All of the actions done on touchscreen can be done with K+M setups, too. Moving a mouse into a corner should be a pretty easy concept. The only problem is on remote desktops and multi-monitor systems.

Quote:

So, my question is :

i'm about to make the switch and buy Windows 8 for my entire set of computers and possibly buy a tablet. I want everything to be compatible and communicate well all-togheter. So I don't want an ARM processor. I don't want anything from apple because i don't like the Apple ecosystem and the mandatory choice to have to install Itunes. I want to drop files via drag and drop or copy paste like i've always did on all my PC, i want everything to work togheter like my domain and my functionnalities always did. But what tablet to choose? what processor to choose? what graphics specs should I look for? Anyone have any suggestion on a good touchscreen monitor compatible with windows 8 multi-point requirement and that will not break my budget for the next 2 years? Will there be any good tablet that combine performance and average-to-good battery life?

Thanks.

Again, you don't need a multi-touch monitor for Windows 8. If you're using it as a desktop, there's little benefit to it. That should save you some money.

Secondly, the real question about tablets is whether you care about using it as a "full" computer. You can buy an ARM tablet, and it'll run all the new apps on it just fine. All of these apps will be usable in a tablet setting. The question is: do you need to install x86 apps on it? Do you plan on using it as a laptop? If your main use is to use it as a tablet 90% of the time, and the only real applications you need on the desktop are Office, then you really don't need an Intel tablet. It's superfluous (and costs more).

So what programs do you really need on your tablet that don't have analogous programs in the Windows Store? If there are a lot, you might need an intel tablet. Otherwise, it might make more sense to save $400 and get an ARM tablet and use that money to buy apps.

Isn't it amazing that this can happen and nobody (that will be heard) is screaming antitrust? Lets say this would have happened 3 years ago - that would have had major antitrust implications. Maybe I am overrating this but isn't that a sure sign of the post wintel (/PC) world?

Interesting. Oddly (for me) I was at a windows 8 talk (the windows store supports javascript and html5 apps) and the presenter showed up 2 tablets. One intel and one ARM. both prototypish.

The interface of win 8 (formerly known as metro) works better on the tablet, but people will probably get used to the context switch on the desktop. Hopefully it won't go the way of apple's forgotten desktop widgets (hit f12 on the mac....)

It was jarring that the windows tablet when into "I'm a desktop computer mode". It wasn't entirely obvious what to do. That being said the performance between the Intel and Arm devices wasn't significant that I could tell.

The A6 isn't even CLOSE to the performance of an i3, it's not close to a current Celeron either. You have to compare to Atom, and Intel's prices for those aren't far off $25.

Yes, I'm well aware of that - I think you misunderstood what I was saying. The point is the cellphone/tablet space is growing, and the notebook/desktop space is shrinking. Intel is facing a market where more and more cpus are $25 cpus, not $200+ cpus and I'm not sure they can make enough money in that kind of market to aggressively push process improvements to the point where they have a huge advantage over everyone else. ATM, they are on .32 and everyone else is on .32 or .28. I assumed they would leverage their .22 process to beat the competition, but they aren't. Why not?

Ok so it's finally coming. The chipset that everyone knew Intel would deliver eventually. The chipset that uses Intel's process advantages to compete head to head with Arm despite the legacy costs of X86. Now the questions:

Why didn't Microsoft just wait this out and avoid what will be a mistaken short-lived foray into Arm?

How will Apple, in the coming years, deal with the fact that they have fragmented platforms in a world where hardware no longer requires it?

Will Microsoft be able to capitalize on the head-start it has integrating phones/tablets/PC's?

Microsoft has to be wondering whether it was really worth it to port Windows to ARM, right about now.

I think it made sense because Windows Phone 8 is supposed to use a lot of the same kernel as Windows 8 and applications are supposed to be easily ported. Having Windows 8 run on both x86 and ARM forces Microsoft's developers to ensure a higher level of compatibility between the OS versions.

The NT kernel was originally developed to run on multiple processors. MIPS, DEC Alpha, PPC, and X86. It was one of the things that forced them into good Kernel design back then. I'm glad they are returning to supporting multiple processors.